On November 4, 2025, the U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island in Williams v. Bally’s Management Group, LLC dismissed a participant challenge to an employer’s tobacco surcharge under ERISA, rejecting both statutory discrimination and fiduciary breach theories. The court held that the plaintiff failed to state a claim that the surcharge violated
Prudent appointment and monitoring of Russell Investments Trust Company (“Russell”) as an ERISA section 3(38) investment manager by the 401(k) Plan Committee (“Committee”) for the Caesars Entertainment Corporation Savings & Retirement Plan (“Plan”) recently paid dividends for the Committee and the plan sponsor, Caesars Holdings, Inc. (“Caesars”)
2. Courts Differ On What Is Required To Support Fiduciary Breach Claims
On August 7, 2025, President Trump issued an Executive Order (“Order”) directing the Department of Labor (“Department”) and U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) to, no later than February 3, 2026, issue rules or guidance – potentially including a safe harbor – intended to encourage the inclusion of alternative assets, such as private equity, cryptocurrency
A rapidly growing line of ERISA cases seeks to impose fiduciary standards of conduct—developed by courts largely in the retirement plan context—to health plan design choices. The most recent, Barbich et al. v. Northwestern University et al., No. 1:25-cv-06849 (N.D. Ill.) filed on June 20, 2025, involves a new and potentially disruptive twist: plaintiffs
On June 30, 2025, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in M&K Employee Solutions, LLC et al. v. Trustees of the IAM Nat’l Pension Fund to address whether the requirement under ERISA section 4211 that multiemployer pension plans compute withdrawal liability based on the plan’s unfunded vested benefits “as of the end” of the plan year
On March 28, 2025, two neighboring district courts issued sharply contrasting decisions on constitutional standing in lawsuits challenging pension risk transfers under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”). The United States District Court for the District of Columbia, in Camire et al. v. Alcoa USA Corp. (“Alcoa Decision”)
In Hansen v. Laboratory Corporation of America, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 193350 (E.D. Wis. 2024), the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin rejected a challenge to the authority of the Department of Labor (DOL) to promulgate a “payroll practice” exemption to the definition of plans covered by the Employee Retirement Income Security
On January 17, 2025, the ERISA Industry Committee (“ERIC”) filed a lawsuit, The ERISA Industry Committee v. United States Department of Health and Human Services et al. challenging the final Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act (“MHPAEA”) rule published by the Departments of Labor, Treasury, and Health and Human Services (the “Departments”) in
A recently filed lawsuit is a good reminder that self-insured health plan fiduciaries have a fiduciary duty to ensure that their health plans are being administered according to the plan’s terms and in compliance with law, while defraying the reasonable expenses of administering the plan. In discharging this responsibility, plan fiduciaries must oversee any party